You are here:

Applying a System Development Approach to Translate Educational Requirements into E-Learning
ARTICLE

, Agder University College, Norway

IJELLO Volume 3, Number 1, ISSN 1552-2237 Publisher: Informing Science Institute

Abstract

E-Learning provides a potentially powerful tool for implementing educational requirements rooted in learning theories. But still, much of the development of e-Learning is carried out without a true understanding of how learning theories can be translated into pedagogical requirements that can be implemented using learning technologies. This is because e-Learning lacks a systematic approach to the development process, resulting in poor requirements analysis and pedagogical design. This paper argues for a systematic system development approach to e-Learning to translate educational requirements into a system that supports effective learning.

Citation

Hadjerrouit, S. (2007). Applying a System Development Approach to Translate Educational Requirements into E-Learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 3(1), 107-134. Informing Science Institute. Retrieved March 25, 2019 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Ahlemann, F., Haas, C., & Hoppe, U. (2003). Integrating e-Learning into modern organizations: A reference model. Proceedings of E-LEARN 2003, Phoenix, Arizona (USA), Nov. 7-11, 1147-1154.
  2. Anohina, A. (2005). Analysis of the terminology used in the field of virtual learning. Educational Technology& Society, 8(3), 91-102.
  3. Balasubramaniam, R., Pries-Heje, J., & Baskerville, R. (2003). Internet software engineering: A different class of processes. Annals of Software Engineering 14, 169-195.
  4. Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. New York: Longman.
  5. Bonk, C.J., & Graham, C.R. (2006). The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer Publishing.
  6. Buzzetto-More, N.A., & Pinhey, K. (2006). Guidelines and standards for the development of fully online learning objects. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 2, 94-104. Available at http://ijklo.org/Volume2/v2p095-104Buzzetto.pdf Cohen, E.B., & Nycz, M. (2006). Learning objects and e-learning: An informing science perspective. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 2, 23-34. Available at http://ijklo.org/Volume2/v2p023-034Cohen32.pdf
  7. Cohrane, T. (2005). Interactive QuickTime: Developing and evaluating multimedia learning objects to enhance both face-to-face and distance e-learning environments. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 1, 33-54. Available at http://ijklo.org/Volume1/v1p033-054Cochrane.pdf Conallen, J. (1999). Modeling web application with UML. New York: Addison-Wesley.
  8. Conole, G., Dyke, M., Oliver, M., & Seale, J. (2004). Mapping pedagogy and tools for effective learning design. Computers and Education, 43(1-2), 17-33.
  9. 131Applying a System Development ApproachThe Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-8.
  10. Duffy, T.M., Lowyck, J., & Jonassen, D.H. (1993). Designing environments for constructive learning. Springer: Berlin.
  11. Dyson, M.C., & Campello, S.B. (2003). Evaluating virtual learning environments: What are we measuring? Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 1(1), 11-20. Available at http://www.ejel.org/volume-1-issue1/issue1-art2-dyson-campello.pdf
  12. Frantiska, J.J. (2003). Going with the flow: Applying the waterfall model of system development to educational website creation. Proceedings of E-LEARN 2003, Phoenix, Arizona (USA), Nov. 7-11, 958-965.
  13. Goodyear, P. (2001). Effective networked learning in higher education: Notes and guidelines. Retrieved March 23, 2006, from: http://www.csalt.lancs.ac.uk/jisc/guidelines_final.doc Govindasamy, T. (2002). Successful implementation of e-learning: pedagogical considerations. The Internet and Higher Education, 4, 287-299.
  14. Graf, F. (2002). Providing security for e-Learning. Computers Graphics, 26, 355-365.
  15. Hadjerrouit, S. (2007). Using an understanding of the learning cycle to build effective e-Learning. In N.A. Buzzetto-More (Ed.), Advanced principles of effective e-Learning (pp. 27-58). Santa Rosa, California:
  16. Harasim, L. (2000). Shift happens: Online learning as a new paradigm in learning. The Internet and Higher Education 3, 41-61.
  17. Horton, S. (2000). Web teaching guide: A practical approach to creating course websites. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  18. Karagiorgi, Y., & Symeou, L. (2005). Translating constructivism into instructional design: Potential and limitations. Educational Technology& Society, 8(1), 17-27. Available at http://www.ifets.info/journals/8_1/5.pdf Kay, R., & Knaack, L. (2005). Developing learning objects for secondary school students: A multicomponent model. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 1, 229-254. Available at http://ijklo.org/Volume1/v1p229-254Kay_Knaack.pdf
  19. Koohang, A., & Harman, K. (2005). Open Source: A metaphor for e-Learning. Informing Science Journal, 8, 75-86. Available at http://inform.nu/Articles/Vol8/v8p075-086Kooh.pdf Krauss, F., & Ally, M. (2005). A study of the design and evaluation of a learning object and implications for content development. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 1, 1-22.
  20. Lin, B., & Hsieh, C. (2001). Web-based teaching and learner control: A research review. Computers& Education, 37(3-4), 377-386.
  21. Lowyck, J., & Poeysae, J. (2001). Design of collaborative learning environments. Computer in Human Behavior, 17(5-6), 507-516.
  22. Maciaszek, L.A. (2001). Requirements analysis and system design: Developing information systems with UML. New York: Addison-Wesley.
  23. Mayes, J.T., & Fowler, C.J. (1999). Learning technology and usability: A framework for understanding courseware. Interacting with Computers, 11(5), 485-497.
  24. HadjerrouitMayes, J.T., & Fowler, C.J. (2005). Mapping theory to practice and practice to tool functionality based on the practitioners' perspective. Retrieved March 28, 2006, from: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/Stage%202%20Mapping%20(Version%201).pdf McCormack, C., & Jones, D. (1998). Building a web-based education system. New Jersey: Wiley. MacDonald, C.J., Stodel, E., Thompson, T., Muirhead, B., Hinton, C., Carson, B. Et al. (2005). Addressing the learning contradiction: A collaborative approach for developing a conceptual framework learning object. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 1, 79-98. Available at http://ijklo.org/Volume1/v1p079-098McDonald.pdf
  25. Montilva, J.A., Sandia, B., & Barrios, J. (2002). Developing instructional websites– A software engineering approach. Education and Information Technologies, 7(3), 201-224. Available at http://www.springerlink.com/content/qh6838g3234561nl/fulltext.pdf Murugesan, S., & Ginige, A. (2001). The Essence of web engineering—Managing the diversity and complexity of web application development. IEEE Multimedia, April-June 2001, 8(2), 22-25.
  26. Nash, S.S. (2005).Practices for online courses. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 1, 217-228. Available at http://ijklo.org/Volume1/v1p217-228Nash.pdfNocols,M.(2003).Atheoryofe-learning.EducationalTechnology&Society,6(2),1-10.Availableathttp://www.ifets.info/journals/6_2/1.html
  27. Nulden, U. (2001). E-education: Research and practice. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 17, 363375.
  28. Pahl, C. (2003). Managing evolution and change in web-based teaching and learning environments. Computers& Education, 40(2), 99-114.
  29. Piaget, J. (1971). Genetic epistemology. W.W. Norton. New York.
  30. Powell, T.A. (1998). Website engineering: Beyond webpage design. Prentice Hall: London.
  31. Pressman, P. (2000). Software engineering: A practitioner’s approach (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  32. Roberts, G. (2003). Teaching using the web: Conceptions and approaches from a phenomenographic perspective. Instructional Science, 31, 127-150.
  33. Salas, K., & Ellis, L. (2006). The development and implementation of learning objects in a higher education setting. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 2, 1-22. Available at http://ijklo.org/Volume2/v2p001-022deSalas.pdf Salmon, C. (2002). E-Tivities: The key to active online learning. London: Kogan Page.
  34. Shiratuddin, N., Hassan, S., & Landoni, M. (2003). A usability study for promoting e-content in higher education. Educational Technology& Society, 6 (4), 112-124. Available at http://www.ifets.info/journals/6_4/11.pdf Steffe, L.P., & Gale J. (Eds.). (1995). Constructivism in education. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  35. Stevens, P., & Pooley, R. (2000). Using UML: Software development with objects and components. London: Addison-Wesley.
  36. Storey, M.A., Phillips, B., Maczewski, M., & Wang, M. (2002). Evaluating the usability of web-based learning tools. Educational Technology& Society, 5(3), 91-100. Available at http://www.ifets.info/journals/5_3/storey.pdf Strodher, J.B. (2003). Cross-cultural issues for Asian e-learners: An analysis based on Hofstede’s cultural dimensions. Proceedings of E-LEARN 2003, Phoenix, Arizona (USA), Nov. 7-11, 1978-1983.
  37. Varlamis, I., & Apostolakis, I. (2006). Present and future of standards for e-Learning technologies. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 2, 59-76. Available at http://ijklo.org/Volume2/v2p059-076Varlamis.pdf
  38. Watson, D.M. (2001). Pedagogy before technology. Re-thinking the relationship between ICT and teaching. Education and Information Technologies, 6(4), 251-266. Available at http://www.springerlink.com/content/w343nq3375053k23/fulltext.pdf Wiley, D.A. (2000). Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory. A definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy. Retrieved January 22, 2006, from: http://reusability.org/read/chapters/wiley.doc
  39. Williams, D.D. (2002). Improving use of learning technologies in higher education through participant oriented evaluations. Educational Technology& Society, 5(3), 11-17. Available at http://www.ifets.info/journals/5_3/williams.pdf Youm, J.H., & Black, J.B. (2005). The potential for an object-oriented model of learning. Proceedings of E-LEARN 2005, Nov 1-5, Washington DC, USA, 1583-1586.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

View References & Citations Map

Cited By

  1. A Systems Engineering Analysis Method for the Development of Reusable Computer-Supported Learning Systems

    David Díez, Camino Fernández & Juan Dodero, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain

    Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects Vol. 4, No. 1 (Jan 01, 2008) pp. 243–257

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Also Read

Related Collections